Scientists have made no judgment as to whether coffee is good or bad for you but has a California judge. He says that coffee sellers in the state should publish cancer warnings.
The culprit is a chemical that is produced in the bean roast process, which is a known carcinogen and was the focus of an eight-year legal dispute between a small non-profit organization
The Council for Education and Research on Toxicology wanted the coffee industry to release acrylamide his processing – as did the potato chip makers when she sued them years ago – or revealed the danger in ominous warning signs or labels. The industry, led by Starbucks Corp., said that the level of the chemical in coffee is not detrimental and risks are overcompensated by benefits.
Chief Justice Elihu Berle of Los Angeles said on Wednesday that the coffee machines had not presented the product (1
The lawsuit was filed against Starbucks and 90 companies under a controversial bill adopted by Californian voters in 1986 for the elimination of carcinogenic chemicals from countless products and also criticized for leading to fast pay-slip shakedowns.
The Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act, better known as Proposition 65, requires warnings for about 900 chemicals known to cause cancer or childbirth defects. It allows individuals, advocacy groups and lawyers to sue on behalf of the state and to collect part of the civil penalties for not issuing the warning.
"This lawsuit has mocked Prophet 65, confused consumers, and does nothing to improve public health," said William Murray, president and CEO of the National Coffee Association, adding that coffee was a healthy drink.
Scientific evidence of coffee has been paced for a long time Recently concerns over the possible dangers of coffee have eased, with some studies having positive health benefits.
In 2016, the World Cancer Organization's cancer agency ruled out coffee from its "possible carcinogens" list.
Studies indicate that coffee is unlikely to cause breast cancer, prostate or pancreatic cancer, and it appears to lower the risks of liver and uterine cancer, the agency said. Evidence is not enough to determine its effect on dozens of other cancers.
Coffee companies have said that it is not possible to remove acrylamide from their product without ruining the taste.
But lawyer Raphael Metzger, who brought the lawsuit and drank few cups of coffee a day, said the industry could remove the chemical without compromising the taste.
"I firmly believe that if the potato chip industry can do it, the coffee industry may," Metzger said. "A warning will not be so effective because it is an addictive product."
Many coffee shops have already issued warnings stating that acrylamide is a carcinogenic chemical in coffee. But signs to be placed at the point of sale are often found in places that are not easily visible, such as under the counter, where cream and sugar are available.
Customers in stores that publish warnings are often unaware [http://www.starbucks.com/] In the afternoon, coffee drinkers in a Los Angeles Starbucks said they would look into the warning or give coffee, which drinks a second thought after the verdict, but the Joe's mug would probably win.
"I just do not do it I think it would stop me," said Jen Bitterman, a digital marketing technologist. "I love the taste, I love the ritual, I love the high, the energy, and I think I'm addicted to it."
Darlington Ibekwe, a lawyer in Los Angeles, said a cancer warning would be annoying I would not stop him from indulging in three bars a week.
"It's like cigarettes, how, damn, now I have to see that?" he said. "Dude, I enjoy my coffee."
The defendants have a few weeks to challenge the verdict before it is final and may appeal to an appellate court.
If the verdict stands, it could be a tough phase of fines that could sweep consumers across the state's borders.
The judge may set another phase of the lawsuit to consider possible civil penalties of up to $ 2,500 per person suspended every day in eight years. That could be an astronomical sum in a state with nearly 40 million inhabitants, though such a massive fine is unlikely.
California's oversized marketplace could make it difficult to customize warp-labeled packaging specifically for stores in the state.
This means that even coffee drinkers with a cancer warning could drink their coffee. Cream and sugar would still be optional.
— Associated Press Writer Amanda Lee Myers of Los Angeles and AP Chief Medical Writer Marilynn Marchione of Milwaukee contributed to this story.